Personally, I support this effort that CFPA is doing. However I know that some CFPA folks are pure antis and it wouldn't take much for them to cross the line and start demanding total bans, like the armchair antis do.

I've had CeaseFire come to my local civic before and they insist that they are not against 2A.

I do want these idiots prosecuted and the book thrown at them, but only if their PUFA charges are valid.

I was jury foreman on a drug trial this past March and myself and another juror on the panel struggled for an hour over a possession of inst. of crime charge because Phila. Police Dept. found a Luger in the kitchen of the drug dealer, which was purchased by his ho. We had to have the statute read from the judge and explained twice while we tried to figure out if it applied.

Towards the end we threw up our hands and guilty'd him on the charge, mostly because the stupid fucker bolted from court when the case was originally called, the judge put out a bench warrant and the whole trial was done in-absentia. If he cared about his future he would have defended the charges.

Now he can sit in CFCF and appeal them from a cell for the next 4.5 years.

I was jury foreman on a drug trial this past March and myself and another juror on the panel struggled for an hour over a possession of inst. of crime charge because Phila. Police Dept. found a Luger in the kitchen of the drug dealer, which was purchased by his ho. We had to have the statute read from the judge and explained twice while we tried to figure out if it applied.

Towards the end we threw up our hands and guilty'd him on the charge, mostly because the stupid fucker bolted from court when the case was originally called, the judge put out a bench warrant and the whole trial was done in-absentia. If he cared about his future he would have defended the charges.

Now he can sit in CFCF and appeal them from a cell for the next 4.5 years.

...

So when you couldn't figure out beyond a reasonable doubt if he was guilty you threw your hands up and declared him guilty ....

It was a bit more than that. The question was whether the charge really applied to him or not.

When I asked that question to the judge on behalf of the jury, the poss. of instrument of crime charge, the response from the judge was that it does apply when the defendant is using the gun as a form of protection for an illegal enterprise. We already found him guilty of narcotics possession and distribution. Ergo, the Luger stayed in.

On top of that, the dealer's gf was the one who ate the PUFA charge for the gun. The dealer himself had 4 active cases at the time of trial and multiple felony convictions (his record was entered into evidence).

But since the gun was in co-possession and he already had felonies, he didn't bother to attempt a direct PUFA charge since we were sitting in the jury box holding a 5-figure sum of black tar heroine and crack cocaine, packets with his fingerprints on it.

I don't know what happened to the gf's case but I remember talking to the narco cop post-trial at a chili cookoff in my hood who was on the car and testified and he mentioned that she tried to flee along with him to Puerto Rico. They were both on their way out of town and they were picked up within minutes of me saying "guilty".

It is not likely that enforcing current law will hurt any honest gun owners. Also it is less likely that the antis will ask for or be able to justify new anti-rights laws when current laws are made to work.

Brick;17274 Wrote:It is not likely that enforcing current law will hurt any honest gun owners. Also it is less likely that the antis will ask for or be able to justify new anti-rights laws when current laws are made to work.

^^^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^^^^^

Frankly this is the first time EVER I have agreed with a tactic from CeaseFire. The courts are where the problem has always been, and its what those on our side have been insisting they target (as opposed to gun shops and more laws), for years now ! So I say, good for them !

BUT ..............................

This is still a BIG problem

"Despite her request for probation, Sampson, a Desert Storm veteran with no prior record, was sentenced to nine to 23 months in prison." 9 to 23 mos for what is supposed to be a minimum, mandatory 5 or is it 10 yr Federal Sentence. Start bouncing all these straw buyers up to the Feds and the word will spread pretty damn fast .

son of the revolution, proud to be a member of pa2a.org since Sep 2012.

Are there any VUFAs that are valid? One is pretty hard pressed to find a section under the UFA valid to charge anyone with. To hope that someone is successfully prosecuted under such a section is to hope that criminals attack your neighbor, and there's no reason that they won't hope you are similarly attacked due to an invalid section of statute.

There may be cause to attach greater penalty to the unlawful use of firearms by those who have already unlawfully used firearms or acted in such a manner to necessitate the exponential increase in punishment. To punish someone who possesses property for that possession is to frustrate the constitutions, and statute already exists for their unlawful acts, but for the appropriate exponentiation of penalty. It is too bad the legislature wasted all that time pumping out unconstitutional acts when they could have been making appropriate law.

Are there any VUFAs that are valid? One is pretty hard pressed to find a section under the UFA valid to charge anyone with. To hope that someone is successfully prosecuted under such a section is to hope that criminals attack your neighbor, and there's no reason that they won't hope you are similarly attacked due to an invalid section of statute.

There may be cause to attach greater penalty to the unlawful use of firearms by those who have already unlawfully used firearms or acted in such a manner to necessitate the exponential increase in punishment. To punish someone who possesses property for that possession is to frustrate the constitutions, and statute already exists for their unlawful acts, but for the appropriate exponentiation of penalty. It is too bad the legislature wasted all that time pumping out unconstitutional acts when they could have been making appropriate law.

PUFA: the Pennsylvania Uniform Firearms Act. VUFA is the state law enforcement and court slang for violating PUFA.

CeaseFirePA's "Courtwatch" program I support because it does align with my ideology (at least there), that a big part of urban gun violence is due to a revolving door program that Common Pleas court and DAs across the state are primarily responsible for.

Repeat VUFA offenders need very strong sentencing and those convicted of straw buyers should not be receiving first-offense leniency (which is why PA sentencing minimums have been changed on straw purchasing).

I've sat in courtrooms watching people who got shit-short sentences their 3rd and 4th VUFA. What kind of lesson is that sending violators?

I believe in arbitrage. Fewer folks will be carrying illegal guns on them if they're aware that it dramatically alters the outcome of their sentencing. They'll switch to knives. As it stands right now, gun charges don't really factor all that much into your sentence for crimes like robbery, burglary, agg assault, etc. The judge assigns an arbitrary sentence for your entire basket of charges and almost always makes them run concurrently.

If gun charges were forced to be separated and sentenced separately with their own set of standards that dramatically boost the time you have to spend locked up on repeat offenses, you'll create the arbitrage needed to change the street calculus.

1st VUFA in connection with a Part 1 crime -- existing sentencing paradigm
2nd VUFA in connection with a Part 1 crime should be 5 year min, no parole, then additional time charged for the Part 1 crime(s). 5 years no parole if solitary charge.
3rd VUFA in connection with a Part 1 crime, 15 years, no parole, then additional time charged for the Part 1 crime(s). 5 years no parole if solitary charge.
4th VUFA in connection with a Part 1 crime, 25 years, no parole, then additional time charged for the Part 1 crime(s). 5 years no parole if solitary charge.
5th VUFA, life in prison with no parole, regardless of whether or not a Part 1 crime is connected to arrest.

What this would do is flip all of Pennsylvania's criminal sentencing guidelines to a question of whether or not you were carrying a firearm illegally in our state.

For Philadelphia alone we'd need to expand prison capacity by about 4,000 more beds to handle it all, but the strategy would decimate violent crime rates in the city. I'm guessing statewide prison capacity would need to be raised to 10,000-15,000 additional beds.